Jump to content

User talk:Happysquirrel/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Draft:Christopher Nil Linton concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Christopher Nil Linton, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Mike Turco deletion page

there are tons of pages (even wiki) that say he has produced things, as well as written mixed and programmed. Look a little harder before you belittle someones work and contrubition to music. If it says Michael Anthony thats Michael Anthony Turco. I see production credits on madonna gang bang / madonna i dont give a / nelly furtado mi plan , lady gaga paparazzi. I ask kindly that you remove the deletion notification as you are in the wrong in this particular case. If not handled properly i will report to your superiors. Thank you

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_Bang_(song) https://www.discogs.com/artist/242862-Michael-Anthony-2 https://www.discogs.com/artist/2678852-Michael-Turco

Hello, you are free to point out any reasons for keeping the new article at the deletion discussion. I did make quite an effort to search for sources and did find some things, mostly bare mentions and credits, either on less notable albums, or in roles which, while crucial, don't confer notability in the Wikipedia sense (the relevant guidelines here are wp:GNG and wp:Music). However, I readily acknowledge I am not an expert on music. The deletion discussion may well result in the article being improved and kept, but in any case, it was filed in good faith.
However, the discussion has to be allowed to occur freely. Therefore, it is crucial that you not remove the notice from the top of the page and that you refrain from aggressive interractions with others involved in the discussion. I do not know what you mean by reporting me to my superiors. I am a volunteer with no particular superiors. You are of course free to bring my behaviour to the attention of administrators at any time, and I will be honoured to be guided by their wisdom and experience. Happy editing! Happy Squirrel (talk) 16:49, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for the advice on the List of Thermal Conductivities. Patriot1423 (talk) 17:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

New message

Hi there. Thanks for your advice. Could yu also check the page Daniel Radcliffe. My edits were deleted by the marketing staff Ben Brown. I just listed all companies that are run and detelted content that is questionable. Please advice me how to report the staff member. If you look at the history of both pages, it shows that this has not been the first time. ALso, how can I get the changes back. Thanks.

Seb

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Thanks! I will add that queue to my editing routine. Happy Squirrel (talk) 04:41, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Review Henri Beau article

Could you offer me some peer review/comments on my Henri Beau up to now? Also how do I get my article reassessed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljohndory (talk • contribs) 18:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Ljohndory: I've had a look. The work you have done is impressive and I have updated the classification to C-class. Congratulations! Less than 10% of articles reach this level. If you want to get assessed for B-class or higher, you should probably contact the Wikiproject directly as I don't feel qualified to review at levels higher than C.
As well as the comments below, you should pay attention to what W.carter has to say as they are a very good editor. In particular, provide the clarification they have requested in the lead.
My only criticism is to be very careful of original research. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and thus a tertiary source. That means our articles are meant to summarise what secondary sources have said about the topic. What particularly struck me with respect to this was the Patronage section and the paragraph about his mother. In both of these, you use well sourced information about general trends to get conclusions about a specific case. Your conclusions are most likely correct, but will need to be removed unless they can be directly sourced. I know this is frustrating, but it is a very necessary policy.
Copyright status of Beau's work is likely a mess. However, if you happen to know for certain any of it is public domain and could take a picture to donate, that would be great. That being said, don't take any chances. If you can't verify a date of publication (not creation), leave it alone. Pictures, though useful, are not absolutely necessary.
Because you mentionned it on the talk page, I would like to say that your citation style is good. I see you have been using citation templates. Keep it up. If you decide to go for formal review to get higher assesment levels (such as Good Article or Featured Article), you may want to get formal copy editing. For the moment, however it seems quite MOS compliant.
If you want, I can help you nominate it for Did you know, as it likely qualifies. Happy editing! Happy Squirrel (talk) 03:27, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
@Happysquirrel: Thank you. In terms of patronage and all that, I'm trying to convey context. Henri Beau in todays term is someone from a poor family who goes to Harvard, Columbia and then to Oxford as a Rhode Scholar. Its important that readers understand he wasn't simply this artist that went to all these prestigious art schools, but he went against all odds to do that even with a poor upbringing. It helps people appreciate his art more.

I still have a lot to write about this artist, the information written so far is only a fraction of what I have available in research. Second, I noticed on Google the search result Henri Beau leads to the french page, which sadly is anemic in content, is there a way to fix that? Its a shame readers could miss a trove of information they might seek.

Hello! Context about his socio-economic background is definately worth putting in. However, a more "follow the sources" way of doing it would be to just mention it, perhaps in the section about his family. We want to give a good impression of who this artist was, but we don't want to give it undue weight if sources have not discussed it much. About having loads more to write: Great news! Keep writing for as long as you want. However, articles don't need to be done to be submitted for DYK. In fact, that process is precisely for articles which are just starting out. Lastly, we have very limited control over what Google does, as we are independent. The order of pages may even depend on your browser language preferences. With any luck, our readers will try both versions and find the information they need. Someone may even translate some of the text to be included in the French version. Happy editing! Happy Squirrel (talk) 04:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Happysquirrel/Archive 3. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Happy Squirrel (talk) 13:21, 19 April 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Women in Science

hi! Thanks for checking out the article on Odile Eisenstein! Do you mind giving me feedback on the article for Valerie Ashby too?

Thanks!

  1. Cortnie330 (talk) 18:29, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi! No problem. First of all, thank you for working to keep the coverage of notable female chemists up to date. Now for how to improve it, I have to agree with R'n'B's tags here.
What he means by "reads like a resumé" is that every last detail of her life is mentionned. Most graduate students end up in some kind of teaching assistant position, so this probably doesn't need to be mentionned. Really prestigious grants and named positions like the NATO one bear mentionning, but the Kodak one probably not. Also, while general dates like graduation from undergrad and PhD, getting of important jobs etc. need to be mentionned, other events can just be situated relative to those ("during this time", "soon after" etc.) Also, some of the sentences don't really flow one from the other, but I think removing extraneous detail might help.
For sourcing, most of the information is from official profiles. These are considered connected to the subject, since professors often have some control of what goes into them. That doesn't mean you can't use them, it just means you should look at getting unconnected sources like, for example [1] or [2]. Of course, not everything can always be sourced to these, but certainly her appointment as dean can.
Apart from that, very nice new article on a solid topic. All it really needs is a bit of a trim and improved sourcing. Happy editing! Happy Squirrel (talk) 12:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I removed some of the extraneous details you mentioned. I'll keep working on it!

Cortnie330 (talk) 13:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Romeo Mancini

Hi Happy Squirrel, I really want to thank you for helping me out with the notes on my page about the artist Romeo Mancini, I have really appreciated what you did, since I wasn't able to do that on my own. Since my article it has been rejected because of the language or tone not good for wikipedia, could you have a look and tell me what's wrong? Thanks again Anna Lisa --Anna Lisa33 (talk) 08:19, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Anna Lisa 33:. The main problem I see is that your submission reads like a story, rather than a formal encyclopedic explanation. The later sections use too much poetic description. You also rely heavily on quotes. While quotes can be useful, the goal of Wikipedia is to summarise what the reliable sources say, not just repeat what his contemporaries said. My suggestion would be, instead of starting out to write a biography, or an analysis of his work, you should just ask yourself "When did the artist live? Where? What did he do? How did those three affect each other?" and try to answer those questions as simply and neutrally as possible. Don't describe, narrate, editorialise etc. Just state the facts baldly. That will give a solid core to your draft. Afterwards you can add small connecting words to make the text work together. Hope that helps! Happy Squirrel (talk) 13:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week : nominations needed!

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Saba Mamulashvili Wiki

Hello, why are you deleting Saba Mamulashvili Public Wiki ? He is real Public figure and young talent i am administrator of his pages. i'd like to cancel deletion of page thanks.

Saba Administration Sabamjr (talk) 14:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello. As the page was newly recreated, I looked it over. Wikipedia does not allow new articles on living people without any sources. I tried to look for sources but could not find any. If you can find and add a reference to a reliable source, then you may remove the tag. Otherwise, it will be deleted in 7 days. This should give you plenty of time to find a source.
On another note, are you connected to Saba Mamulashvili? If so you should read the conflict of interest policy and follow what it says. Happy editing. Happy Squirrel (talk) 14:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Saba Mamulashvili

The article was previously deleted per afd (as well as a speedy), if you checked the history-it got removed as well. (for Saba Mamulashvili). Wgolf (talk) 17:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Ciao

best patroller
Hi,

thanks for ur formatting changes on my contribution. I will make the content changes you suggested as soon as it is possible..it takes time to organize it well taking into account what is already on wikipedia and respecting all the copyrights.. cheers a Acerase (talk) 18:05, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

@Acerase: Thank you so much! It was a pleasure. Happy Squirrel (talk) 18:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, Happysquirrel. Thanks for reviewing my article. For now, I'll fill the table and then start writing something. Thanks for your help. BTW, do you watch Rugby?

Hi @Alexei177:. Glad to know I can help. Now that there is a lead, at all, you can start with the table. As for watching Rugby, I actually don't, I just watch the New Pages Feed :) There's a whole bunch of us who make a point of checking each new article and giving it a shove in the right direction. Cheers! Happy Squirrel (talk) 17:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

15:37:20, 26 April 2016 review of submission by Bill the Brit




I have re-submitted the page for Brooklawn which was previously declined due to a lack of notability. I am having issues with that reasoning. The Country Club is as notable as the people who have played there and the important tournaments it has hosted.

When I look at Scioto country Club and Ganton Golf Club for example, both have far less notability than what we have submitted for Brooklawn. Bill the Brit (talk) 15:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Bill the BritBill the Brit (talk) 15:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

20:36:41, 29 April 2016 review of submission by Andramere


Regarding your review of my draft of a proposed ISTE Standards page: Happysquirrel, you suggested that I merge my changes for the ISTE Standards page into the current entry for National Educational Technology Standards, which I did. You also commented that you could move the page to a new page with the ISTE Standards title, as you do not have any conflict of interest. Are you still willing to do this? I would appreciate it. The new page name would accurately reflect the standards' current official name, which the page title National Educational Technology Standards does not. Andramere (talk) 20:36, 29 April 2016 (UTC)andramere

Thank you for supporting my RfA

Human lightning rod not to scale Brianhe RfA Appreciation award
Thank you for participating at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated even if I did get a bit scorched. Brianhe (talk) 02:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Christopher Nil Linton

Hello, Happysquirrel. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Christopher Nil Linton".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Onel5969 TT me 13:09, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Rohan Ali

Seems like the guy keeps on adding links to FB/wiki to Rohan Ali despite being told otherwise, maybe a afd could be the best? Wgolf (talk) 02:47, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good. This time he had added some reliable sources about Mark Zuckerberg (like why?). Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
And now its about some other unrelated dude. BTW, I also nominated the image for deletion. It comes from the The Twilight Saga (film series). Happy Squirrel (talk) 03:00, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Bon soir!

It is with a Québécois "merci beaucoup" for your efforts, and in the spirit of promoting peace and goodwill on Wikipedia that I have the honor to bestow the Random Smiley Award to Happysquirrel!! Merci beaucoup, SeaBeeDee!

In the interest of promoting sweetness and light, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Chocolate Chip Smiley Award
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

SeaBeeDee 08:25, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

My contribution

Acerase (talk) 09:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC) I will make the suggested changes asap. Please note that I did not want to create contents duplications in my contribution..that's why it is short. However, i wil try to make it easier to understand to non-specialistic people.. Cheers acerase

@Acerase: No problem. Most of our articles are quite short and to my mind there is no harm in that. Thank you for your continuing efforts. You may find that adding the necessary background for non-specialists will increase the length. Happy Squirrel (talk) 18:24, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Acerase (talk) 19:18, 12 May 2016 (UTC) Thanks for your answer..Can you re-rank my page when I am done please? I will let you know when it is done.. Thanks! a

A brownie for you!

cheers Acerase (talk) 20:08, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 May 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 June 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thanks that there are people like you G.M. Pizzinini (talk) 07:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 July 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

BLPPROD

Hi, I reverted your addition of a BLPPROD to Eddie Astanin because while there were no footnotes there was an extensive references section. WP:BLPPROD requires that an "article contain no sources in any form" (emp. orig.) JbhTalk 16:48, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Jbhunley: and thank you for letting me know. I did need to re-read it. I usually see it applied as requiring that the article explicitly link source to statement in some fashion, but a careful reading does indeed show this is not the case. Happy Squirrel (talk) 21:06, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Yeah... I always wish it could be applied like that too (and require the source be RS as well) :) Anyway, I stubbed the article. It may even be worth taking to AfD since the Russian version is as bad/PROMO as ours was even after going through what passes for AfD there. Seems like he gets quoted a lot but no one really writes about him. Have an enjoyable weekend, we're getting a heat wave in my part of the world so I wish you cool weather as well. Cheers. JbhTalk 22:08, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Happysquirrel/Archive 3. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Happy Squirrel (talk) 23:04, 12 May 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Happysquirrel/Archive 3. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Happy Squirrel (talk) 23:04, 12 May 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

The Signpost: 21 July 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 August 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 August 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 September 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 September 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

RfC for page patroller qualifications

Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:48, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Happysquirrel,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help

Hi Happysquirrel,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Happysquirrel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer - RfC

Hi Happysquirrel. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 December 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13Talk 16:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:18, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week seeking nominations (and a new facilitator)

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 February 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback, it was short, had a high information density and had all the information I needed. Wish you well! Student342 (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 August 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 November 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Happysquirrel. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:34, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 May 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 June 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 October 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 October 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Happysquirrel. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 December 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Happysquirrel/Archive_3&oldid=1077886111"